← Risk register SOC 49-3042 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Mobile Heavy Equipment Mechanics, Except Engines

176,600 US workers · median $65,510/yr · Trades

SAFE

The core of this job is crawling over excavators, dozers, cranes and haul trucks in mud, cold and dust — pulling hydraulic cylinders, rebuilding final drives, chasing intermittent electrical faults, replacing undercarriage — none of which robotics can do at field sites. AI is genuinely eating the diagnostic paperwork layer: fault-code interpretation, telematics-driven failure prediction, service manual lookup, warranty claim write-ups and parts ordering. What remains is the physical repair plus the call on whether a machine is safe to return to a job site with a crew depending on it, which is a real accountability role even without a license.

10-year outlook: Demand holds or grows as fleets get more electronically complex; the diagnostic guesswork shrinks while the wrench time and the safety sign-off stay firmly human.

US employment, 2019–2025+19.5%
147,800176,600 workers

Headcount grew steadily across the period.

Median pay $53,370 → $65,510 -1.8% in real terms (nominal +22.7%, less ~25% US inflation over the period)

The job count is not the verdict

This line is counted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics — the one figure on this page that isn't a judgement of ours. Headcount moves on demand, offshoring, demographics and the business cycle, and automation is one term among several, often not the loudest.

So a falling line is not evidence that AI did it, and a rising one is not evidence that it won't. Both happen in this register: some occupations resist automation and shrink anyway, others are highly automatable and keep growing. The marked year is 2020.

BLS projection, 2024–2034

+5.8% 188,700 → 199,600 on the projections basis

Hard to automate, and growing

The work resists current AI and the BLS projects +5.8% more of these jobs by 2034. Note that safe does not mean well paid — several of the fastest-growing resistant occupations are among the lowest paid on the register.

Different clocks. The score is what current AI could do to this work today. The projection is how many of these jobs will exist in 2034. Everything between the two — how fast employers actually adopt, whether demand grows in the meantime — is why they can point opposite ways without either being wrong.

~16,500 openings a year on average, including replacing people who leave.

One email if this score changes. Watch as many occupations as you like from the same address — no account, and nothing is sent on a schedule, only when a verdict actually moves.

Also known as — 24 job titles this covers

Titles reported by people doing this work, from the US Department of Labor's O*NET survey. If your job title is here, this page is about your work even though the name doesn't match.

MechanicTrucksmithBrake MechanicCrane MechanicField MechanicHoist MechanicHydro MechanicTruck MechanicClutch MechanicDinkey MechanicDredge MechanicMaster MechanicMobile MechanicShovel MechanicCrane TechnicianField TechnicianDragline MechanicForklift MechanicSki Lift MechanicBulldozer MechanicEquipment MechanicFork Lift MechanicHydraulic MechanicMachine Overhauler

Score — 67/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (20/20). Weakest point: liability shield (5/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 17 + 20 + 5 + 11 + 14 = 67. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 17/20

Tasks largely resist digitisation Diagnosing a leaking travel motor by feel and sound, torquing track shoe bolts to spec, pressing bushings, and re-shimming a swing gearbox are irreducibly manual — telematics may point you at a circuit, but the wire-by-wire chase behind a cab harness on a 12-year-old dozer still happens with a multimeter in your hand, which is why this sits at 17 rather than mid-band; the paperwork and fault-code lookup layer that AI does absorb is real but is a small slice of the shift.

Embodiment 20/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments 20 is the ceiling because the work goes to the machine, not the reverse: field service trucks to muddy pits, quarries and highway shoulders, working under a raised bucket, in trenches, on ladders against a haul truck tire taller than you, in whatever weather the site has that day — no controlled bay, no fixed fixture, no repeatable approach path.

Liability shield 5/20

Certification preferred, not legally required No state licence gates this trade — you can be hired on mechanical aptitude alone; the 5 reflects that employers and dealers lean hard on OEM certifications (Caterpillar, Deere, Komatsu), ASE Medium/Heavy Truck series, plus EPA 609/608 for A/C refrigerant work and crane-related inspection credentials in some jurisdictions, but none of that puts your personal name on the legal hook the way a PE stamp or an aircraft mechanic's A&P signature does.

Trust premium 11/20

Some relationship component 11 reflects that fleet managers and site supers request specific mechanics by name because you know which of their 40 machines has the chronic hydraulic leak and which operator abuses the transmission, and a dealer's field tech keeps accounts alive — but the machine's downtime cost drives the call more than loyalty does, and a competent stranger who shows up faster will get the work.

Judgment & accountability 14/20

Exists to be accountable for ambiguous calls 14 is earned at the moment you decide a machine goes back into service: signing off a repaired crane hoist brake, a rebuilt steering circuit, or a brake system on a haul truck running a downhill grade means a crew's safety rides on your call, and you make it with incomplete information — no torque spec tells you whether a marginal pin bore will hold another 500 hours or whether that intermittent fault will strand the machine mid-lift.

Scored twice. An independent second run returned 67/100 — SAFE, agreeing with the verdict above.

This score sits on a verdict boundary. At 67/100 it is one point from EXPOSED. Re-scoring moves results by a point or two, so here the score is more informative than the label.

Confidence: high · reviewed 2026-08-11 · how scoring works

What this job involves — and which parts are yours

The verdict above describes this occupation as a whole. Almost nobody does the typical version of a job — tick what's actually in your week and see how your own mix sits.

AI already does these at usable quality

These still need a person

Active moats on the surviving side: embodiment, physical-presence, judgment

How to future-proof this job

Where to go deeper on what this job runs on: MIT OpenCourseWare — circuits, systems and diagnostic method, free and ungated free · Apprenticeship.gov — paid, employer-sponsored trade apprenticeships, searchable by trade and ZIP paid to train · Apprenticeship.gov — industrial maintenance and millwright programs paid to train · edX — operations management and process monitoring courses free to audit · OSHA Outreach Training — the 10- and 30-hour cards most employers ask for low · Coursera — engineering and procurement courses, auditable without paying free to audit

All 35 skills ranked by how many jobs they open →

What would move this back up — beyond any one person

The moves above are yours to make. This is the other half: what would have to change in the world for the occupation itself to score higher. None of it is in any one person's gift, but it is where the floor actually comes from. Scores here are not a one-way ratchet. Only two of the five dimensions — task resistance and embodiment — track what machines can do. The other three track law, what buyers will pay for, and who is answerable, and those move in both directions, often in response to the same pressure AI creates. If every lever below landed, this occupation would score around 85/100, still SAFE.

5 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening trust premium +3

    Independent (non-dealer) repair rights: if state right-to-repair statutes for agricultural and construction equipment (Colorado HB24-1121 already covers ag; similar bills filed elsewhere) force OEMs to release diagnostic tools, independent shops can compete on a named-technician relationship rather than being locked out — buyers paying for a specific trusted mechanic rather than a dealer queue

  • already happening task resistance +2

    Task-mix shift is genuine here: the occupation has a routine tier (fault-code lookup, manual retrieval, warranty write-ups, parts ordering) and a judgment tier (intermittent electrical faults, wear-vs-failure calls, field improvisation on out-of-production machines). As OEM telematics platforms absorb the routine tier, the residual day is the tier AI cannot reach — plus growing electrification and high-voltage battery work on machines like Cat and Volvo electric excavators, which adds new non-automatable diagnostic labor

  • plausible liability shield +6

    Mandatory periodic inspection/certification of mobile cranes and aerial lifts by a qualified person is already in OSHA 1926.1412 and ANSI/ASME B30.5 — if state licensing boards or OSHA extend named, personally-signed competency certification (like NCCCO's crane inspector credential) to excavators, dozers and haul trucks used on public works, the mechanic's sign-off becomes a legally required licensed act rather than an employer-internal judgment

  • plausible liability shield +4

    Insurer-driven documentation: if construction equipment insurers or bonding companies require a named, credentialed technician's signature on return-to-service records as a condition of coverage after a fatality claim (already routine in aviation and elevator work), personal exposure attaches without any new statute

  • plausible judgment accountability +3

    If mine or highway agencies formalize the return-to-service decision as a named individual's responsibility in incident investigation practice — as MSHA already does for mobile equipment defect records under 30 CFR 56.14100 — the accountability becomes documented and attributable rather than diffuse

The limit. Embodiment is already maxed at 20 and cannot rise. The realistic ceiling is roughly high-70s: liability_shield is the only dimension with substantial headroom, and equipment-mechanic licensing has no national professional body pushing for it the way electricians or elevator constructors do. Trust premium is structurally capped because the buyer is a fleet manager optimizing downtime cost, not a consumer choosing a human for its own sake.

These are conditions, not forecasts — what would have to happen, not what will. Specific rules, cases and bills are named so you can go and check whether they exist and where they stand; verify before relying on any of them. Nothing here is legal or financial advice.

Where this work is, and what it pays there

BLS metro figures for 362 areas. The verdict above does not change by city — the rubric judges what the work involves, not where it happens — but pay and headcount do, and the national median hides a very wide range.

Most of these jobs

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 6,610 $81,000 +24%
Houston-Pasadena-The Woodlands, TX 5,330 $62,410 -5%
Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX 4,620 $62,860 -4%
Phoenix-Mesa-Chandler, AZ 4,460 $63,440 -3%
New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 4,380 $78,060 +19%
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Roswell, GA 3,480 $60,730 -7%
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 3,090 $76,040 +16%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 2,570 $74,090 +13%

Best paid

Fairbanks-College, AK 260 $104,000 +59%
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 510 $95,980 +47%
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 2,370 $95,410 +46%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $65,510. Counts are jobs in that metro, not vacancies. Metros where the BLS suppressed the cell are absent rather than shown as zero.

Who is actually doing this — nobody, on the record

We have no reported case of a named organisation automating this occupation. Not one deployment, not one announcement.

That is worth saying out loud next to a score of 67. The verdict above is about what the work exposes — what current AI could do to these tasks. It is not a claim that anyone has done it. For this occupation those two things have come apart completely: the capability argument is on this page, and the evidence column is empty.

Read that as a gap in the reporting we can see, not proof of absence — the dispatch runs on English-language feeds and misses plenty. If you know of a case, tell us, or add a field report from inside the job.

Quick take — do you do this job?

Has AI actually changed your work? One tap, anonymous, and the running tally is public. Nothing else is asked of you.

Self-reported and unverified — a sentiment signal, not a survey. One response per person per occupation; you can change your answer.

Field reports — what people say has changed

No field reports yet. A written account takes a paragraph rather than a tap, goes to an editor before it appears, and is the one thing on this page the rubric cannot produce on its own.

File a field report

Concrete beats general: a tool that arrived, a task that moved, a headcount decision you watched happen. Don't include anything that identifies you or your employer if that would put you at risk.

Watch this verdict
Kept current

Rather than check back: get the digest and we'll tell you what changed — or watch a single occupation from its own page.